Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

I will have to think about this one. I am leaning toward skynet though...

Originally Posted by bmack86

And it's been long established that Chris hates fun.

Originally Posted by Hatinisbad

I took my niece this year and it was her first Coachella. It was so fun to see it through her eyes. She thought it felt like a magical scene from Shreck. The one where all the fairy tale creatures meet for the first time in Shreck's swamp.

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

I def would love to take some of those robots apart but it would be much better to take down the agents with ubercool moves and guns and raise some hell in the matrix. Besides, you get you're brand new nokia with the job.

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

The Matrix, no question. The machines might have a much more well-defined upper hand in the Matrix, but they're more or less "human"- that is, they're not all bent on human destruction, and it's possible to reason with them.

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

Originally Posted by Cpt. Funkaho

The Matrix, no question. The machines might have a much more well-defined upper hand in the Matrix, but they're more or less "human"- that is, they're not all bent on human destruction, and it's possible to reason with them.

The machines in The Matrix are fucking retarded. If Artificial Intelligence can't figure out a better way of manufacturing power than growing humans it isn't fucking intelligent at all. That whole premise was so preposterous from an energy efficiency perspective it ruined any chance the series ever had to be seen as anything more than just a blatant rip-off of Terminator revisioned as a blatant rip-off of Star Wars with William Gibson's bullshit acting as The Force.

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

Originally Posted by thelastgreatman

The machines in The Matrix are fucking retarded. If Artificial Intelligence can't figure out a better way of manufacturing power than growing humans it isn't fucking intelligent at all. That whole premise was so preposterous from an energy efficiency perspective it ruined any chance the series ever had to be seen as anything more than just a blatant rip-off of Terminator revisioned as a blatant rip-off of Star Wars with William Gibson's bullshit acting as The Force.

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

I just don't buy it can possibly be that difficult to outwit a computer collective that doesn't realize it'd be smarter to keep all their human "power generators" sedated beyond the point of ever awakening than to go to the extraneous hassle of inventing a fake world just like their old world for them to all daydream in constantly. Like such smart machines couldn't find a way to pump them all full of thorazine rendering them unable of movement or wakefulness but at the same time body heat induction chemicals to up their energy ooutput.

The whole shit is ridiculous. At least Skynet was simple and logical therefore singular in purpose and methodology--and that's hard to defeat. The Matrix had some bearded philosophical douchebag running it (completely contrary to how a compouter system should logically run), effectively rendering it a large computer network at the control of one not-human-enough intelligence. Skynet was the IG88 equivalent of The Matrix's Boba Fett--a robot cannot be bribed, and is therefore more trustworty.

Re: Which Post Apocalyptic Machine Would You Fight?

Indeed. But what does fighting the matrix inside the computers really do? Not much. The battle still needs to be waged in real life. At least with skynet you aren't lulled into some fantasy world. That way you can maintain razor sharp instincts to hunt terminators.